Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1998

Aubrey Equities, Inc. v. Goldberg

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York · Decided February 10, 1998 · Andrias, Mazzarelli, Milonas, Sullivan

247 A.D.2d 253; 668 N.Y.S.2d 598; 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1060

Cases that cite this one

8 later published cases cite this decision.

Altshuler Shaham Provident Funds, Ltd. v. GML Tower LLC (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
Yesmin v. Aliobaba, LLC (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2025)
Singh v. Ahamad (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2017)
425 East 26th Street Owners Corp. v. Beaton (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2015)
George v. Grand Bay Associates Enterprise Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2007)
U.S. Bank National Ass'n v. Vanvliet (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2005)
Sakow v. 633 Seafood Restaurant, Inc. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2003)
Marcus Dairy, Inc. v. Jacene Realty Corp. (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York 2002)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Walter Tolub, J.), entered December 20, 1996, which, inter alia, granted plaintiffintervenor’s motion to reargue and renew a prior order of the same court and Justice entered May 10, 1996, and upon such reargument and renewal, vacated, cancelled and set aside said order, and restored title to the premises to plaintiff-intervenor, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

In this foreclosure action, the IAS Court properly found that intervenor, as a good faith purchaser for value, is entitled to retain title to the premises purchased from the Referee prior to this Court’s reversal of the judgment of foreclosure (212 AD2d 397), and that appellants, notwithstanding intervenor’s knowledge at the foreclosure sale that an appeal was pending, are relegated to an action for money damages on their underlying debt as they failed to seek a stay of enforcement of the foreclosure sale (CPLR 5523; see, Da Silva v Musso, 76 NY2d 436; see also, 13 Weinstein-Korn-Miller, NY Civ Frac 6501.12). We have considered appellants’ remaining arguments and find them to be without merit.

Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Milonas, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.